Is there any doubt the Obama machine had all intentions and purposes of derailing and sabotaging the Trump presidency?
The Obama administration worked in its final weeks in office to undermine the incoming Trump White and continues to do so, according to multiple sources both in and out of the White House.
Behind the effort, these sources say, are senior government officials who previously worked under President Obama and remain loyal to his agenda. These individuals leak negative information about the Trump White House and its senior staff to a network of former Obama administration officials who then plant this information in key media outlets including the Washington Post and New York Times.
Meanwhile, holdovers from the Obama administration are working to undermine the Trump administration’s agenda through efforts to alter official communications, a number of administration officials confirmed in conversations with the Washington Free Beacon.
Multiple sources expressed concern over what they described as an unprecedented effort by the former administration to subvert President Donald Trump’s team. These sources would only speak on background because they were not officially authorized to publicly discuss the situation, which is said to have fostered a level of discomfort and distrust in the West Wing.
The Free Beacon first reported on several portions of this effort earlier this year, including separate campaigns to undermine current CIA Director Mike Pompeo and former national security adviser Michael Flynn, both of whom were subjected to leaks aimed at undermining their credibility…
Ace @ AoSHQ: Rep. Nunes: Trump Transition Team Members, Possibly Including Trump Himself, Were “Under Surveillance” After November ElectionsUpdate: Nunez Says He’s Seen “Dozens” Of Intelligence Reports That Indicate Some Kind of Surveillance
One, Nunes has been one of the guys pushing hardest to uncover the spying-on-Trump mystery.
Two, I can easily conceive of many scenarios in which one can honestly say “It depends on what you mean by spying.”
Let me offer a few scenarios.
Scenario A: An intel group purposefully targets Trump personnel for data interception. Everyone would say this is spying. Though if it were done pursuant to a legal warrant, we wouldn’t necessarily say that. We’d say they were lawfully surveilled. (Though we might also say they were surveilled by a warrent obtained for political purposes.) Even in this easiest-case scenario, there are arguments.
Scenario B: An intel group targets Russian officials, incidentally picks up Flynn conversations, then reviews its intercepts later specifically looking for Trump associates in the collected information. This seems like spying, but one can argue about it: the capture of Flynn’s conversations was incidental, but the determined effort to sift through captured conversations specifically searching for Flynn’s voice is deliberate. Is this spying? It’s not before-the-fact spying, but it sure looks like after-the-fact spying.
Scenario C: Let’s say Trump’s team did not take the threat of Obama loyalists seriously enough for a while. Let’s say that certain well-placed Obama holdovers could overhear Trump communications. Let’s say the loyalists then collected the communications they had overheard to and began using them for purposes of Opposition Research.
Is this “spying”? In this scenario, the communications were not illegally intercepted. They’re being used after-the-fact for purposes not intended by Trump, but they were not exactly “captured.”
Anyway, Nunes seems like a pretty stand-up guy and I would not knock him for his statement. I would believe him when he says it’s a bit complicated.
I mean, to me, this is “spying” at least in the broad, sloppy sense Trump intended, and vindicates Trump well enough….
Meanwhile, being a democrat as opposed to a republican has its perks, I guess…
The DC EXCLUSIVE: Podesta Was Board Member Of Firms Linked To Russian Investors